Last I checked the failure rate for renewable energy initiatives has been just above 1%. Wow what a horrible record that is. I mean usually the
government failure rate is much higher than that. Private investments are just around 40%. But who cares about facts right or percentages right. The
only percentage people seem to care about is that 51% voted for Obama and I think it was 48% didn't.

It is amazing how people can be blinded by hate but of course if the only news a person watches is from Fox then I understand how a person can be so
misinformed and angry.

thinkprogress.org...
ile=nc
Now, despite a worldwide uproar over the Bank’s interest in one of the world’s largest coal ‘mega-mines’ in Australia, it has been linked to
another Australian mega mine that would bring coal across the Great Barrier Reef. Underwriting this potential destruction of the Great Barrier Reef is
an unacceptable use of U.S. tax payer dollars — and it’s time Ex-Im Bank came clean on its involvement.
- snip -
It got so bad that the Sierra Club wrote an open letter to President Fred Hochberg after we witnessed first hand the destruction these projects are
wreaking on communities and livelihoods (check out our blog on the Sasan coal project in India).
- snip -
So how did President Hochberg react? By quietly talking with another Indian company to finance another mega mine – this time with Adani group whose
record of violations would give most institutions pause.

or this one ... Re: Notice of Export-Import Bank’s Violations of U.S. Environmental Laws in
Financing the Australia Pacific LNG and Queensland Curtis LNG Projects ...
www.biologicaldiversity.org...

Last I checked the failure rate for renewable energy initiatives has been just above 1%. Wow what a horrible record that is. I mean usually the
government failure rate is much higher than that. Private investments are just around 40%. But who care about facts right.

It is amazing how people can be blinded by hate but of course if the only news a person watches is from Fox then I understand how a person can be so
misinformed and angry.

Who said any thing about Fox??

And I'm not about hate, just the absurdity of spending billions when our country is in an economic turmoil.
But hey, who cares, right?
Oh yeah, the economy is doing just grand.......[keep drinking the koolaid]

The F35 program is going to cost us around 1.45 trillion dollars over the next 50 years. That's for a plane that will probably never see any combat
whatsoever.

If you're actually glad to see money go toward the military, I'm not sure what to think. The modern American military is Big Brother's wet dream.
The fact that our military's primary goal is the spread of American imperialism should be enough to deter anyone from supporting it.

But you know, I guess what the world really needs is more collateral damage.

The F35 program is going to cost us around 1.45 trillion dollars over the next 50 years. That's for a plane that will probably never see any combat
whatsoever.

Maybe, maybe not. Other countries are interested in purchasing this plane, so I guess in time, we'll know.

WASHINGTON, Nov 9 (Reuters) - Singapore is showing increased interest in buying Lockheed Martin Corp's F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, a top executive
with the company said late on Thursday, a week after China unveiled a second stealth fighter called the J-31.

Lockheed is building three variants of the stealthy warplane for the U.S. military and eight international partners -- Britain, Australia, Canada,
Norway, Denmark, Italy, Turkey and the Netherlands, which are helping fund the plane's development.

Singapore became a security partner on the international fighter program in February 2003, along with Israel, which has already ordered an initial
batch of the jets.

As security partners, Singapore and Israel both pledged to contribute about $50 million to the F-35 development effort, according to the
globalsecurity.org website.

50 years.......1.45 trillion dollars.
That's not as bad as it sounds when you consider how much is being spent now in one year on government programs where as that is an estimate for 50
years, which 8 partners are helping fund the plane's development.

Originally posted by Tardacus
the president doesnt have the power to give away any money it`s up to congress to decide how to spend tax payers money, so if asia gets the 6 bil
blame YOUR congress person.

When was the last time Obama respected Congress?

He does what he wants and the voters have given him the OK to keep doing it.

Peace

let me repharse what i previously said
the president does not have authority under the constitution to give money to anyone, only congress is authorized under the constitution to spend
money on behalf of the federal government.
every single penny that the government has spent or will spend was authorized by congress and only congress.
if you don`t like where the government spends it`s money you need to take it up with your congress person because they are the ones who make the final
decision on where to spend our tax money.

if you don`t like where the government spends it`s money you need to take it up with your congress

Remember wha happened when a group of people who were sick of Govt overspending took to the streets with signs protesting excessive spending? They got
called terrorists in Brooks Bros clothing because they were such a threat to the liberal establishment.

The F35 program is going to cost us around 1.45 trillion dollars over the next 50 years. That's for a plane that will probably never see any combat
whatsoever.

If you're actually glad to see money go toward the military, I'm not sure what to think. The modern American military is Big Brother's wet dream.
The fact that our military's primary goal is the spread of American imperialism should be enough to deter anyone from supporting it.

But you know, I guess what the world really needs is more collateral damage.

The difference is that the defense of our nation is the job of our govt per the Constitution. Making Asia green is not.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.